• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Influenced? IGN + Game Informer = EVERY major multiplatform release 8.5 or higher

T

TheNatural

My Member!
IGN is one of the largest videogame site on the internet, recently purchased by Ziff Davis, and has infamously been influenced by publishers in various ways in helping them promote games through advertisement.

The same goes for Game Informer, owned by Gamestop, and is a common tool for exclusive reveals of future games and advertising for one of the most circulated magazines in the US.

I've always thought it was weird how if you take these two entities and how they review games, one or the other will rate EVERY single multiplatform release highly. At least 8.5, but usually significantly higher. Here are some examples going back to mid last year, the highest review score of the two listed and by whom. With the 9 and above scores bolded, which turns out to be 16 of the 23 releases.

Bioshock Infinite 9.5 (IGN)
Tomb Raider 9.25 (GI)
Crysis 3 8.5 (both)
Metal Gear Rising Revengeance 8.5 (IGN)
Dead Space 3 9.75 (GI)
Devil May Cry 9.0 (GI)
Far Cry 3 9.0 (both)
Hitman Absolution 9.0 (IGN)
Call of Duty: Black Ops II 9.3 (IGN)
Assassins Creed III 9.5 (GI)
Need for Speed Most Wanted 9 (both)
WWE 13 9.0 (GI)
Dishonored 9.2 (IGN)
Resident Evil 6 8.75 (GI)
NBA 2K13 9.1 (IGN)
Dead or Alive 5 8.8 (IGN)
FIFA Soccer 13 9.0 (IGN)
Borderlands 2 9.75 (GI)
F1 2012 9.0 (IGN)
NHL 13 8.5 (IGN)
Tekken Tag Tournament 8.5 (GI)
Madden NFL 13 9.0 (IGN)
Sleeping Dogs 8.5 (IGN)

And on and on and on ...

Is this an instance of EVERY single major third party release being just that good, or the fact that these two major media entities constantly dealing with publisher exclusive reveals (or reviews), advertisement money, and knowing where their bread is buttered that they know the best way to get on the good side of these third parties is in the numbers?
 
W

Wuthering_Heights

Banned
images
 
C

CoffeeJanitor

Member
It's as if these publications aren't completely objective or something.

That can't be true, though...Gaming Journalism is top tier!
 
ULTROS!

ULTROS!

People seem to like me because I am polite and I am rarely late. I like to eat ice cream and I really enjoy a nice pair of slacks.
I'll add in FFXIII scoring 9.25/10 and 8.9/10 at GI and IGN respectively. :p
 
mr stroke

mr stroke

Member
TheNatural said:
Bioshock Infinite 9.5 (IGN)
Tomb Raider 9.25 (GI)
Crysis 3 8.5 (both)
Metal Gear Rising Revengeance 8.5 (IGN)
Dead Space 3 9.75 (GI)
Devil May Cry 9.0 (GI)
Far Cry 3 9.0 (both)
Hitman Absolution 9.0 (IGN)
Call of Duty: Black Ops II 9.3 (IGN)
Assassins Creed III 9.5 (GI)
Need for Speed Most Wanted 9 (both)
WWE 13 9.0 (GI)
Dishonored 9.2 (IGN)
Resident Evil 6 8.75 (GI)
NBA 2K13 9.1 (IGN)
Dead or Alive 5 8.8 (IGN)
FIFA Soccer 13 9.0 (IGN)
Borderlands 2 9.75 (GI)
F1 2012 9.0 (IGN)
NHL 13 8.5 (IGN)
Tekken Tag Tournament 8.5 (GI)
Madden NFL 13 9.0 (IGN)
Sleeping Dogs 8.5 (IGN)
Click to expand...


problem is all those games are actually great/good games
 
Z

zroid

Banned
As insidious as it may seem, frankly most of those games can easily be considered excellent by many standards. The only one which immediately stands out to me is AssCreed 3. And even it has its fans.
 
T

TheNatural

My Member!
LumpOfCole said:
Sleeping Dogs is the best 8.5 game I've ever played.
Click to expand...

No doubt it looks like a great game, even underrated.

It also had one of the lower advertising budgets as well, being risen from the development grave by S-E. If the exact same game was released by Activision or EA with a huge marketing campaign, I wonder if it would have hit 9's and above across the board.
 
A

AniHawk

Member
i guess my problem with it is that it's an 8-10 scale. a 9 out of 10 can mean many different things, but for me, it's something only the best in a generation should receive. it's handed out like candy when really most of those games are pretty good in their year (more like a 7-8).
 
M

Mushroomer25

Member
This sounds logical for a minute, until I think of Aliens: Colossal Marines & Medal of Honor: Warfighter. Both big multiplat releases, both with plenty of marketing - and trashed by the critics.

So I think you're just a tad paranoid, son.
 
S

snoopeasystreet

Member
Those are all games that I could see someone liking a bunch. I'm also guessing the people reviewing them were somewhat exited about the game and went in with all intentions to enjoy it. Not saying there couldn't be something sinister going on but it just loss like good games getting positive scores to me
 
S

Servbot24

Banned
Keep in mind gaming sites have a very skewed metric. Duke Nukem, Survival Instinct and Colonial Marines all received close to a 5/10 on IGN. Which should mean that they were just your average games, when they were in fact described as exceptionally bad in the reviews. To score lower than that the game basically has to be unplayable. For most functional games, the scale is 5-10.
 
L

Liabe Brave

Member
TheNatural said:
I've always thought it was weird how if you take these two entities and how they review games, one or the other will rate EVERY single multiplatform release highly.
Click to expand...
There's no need to go on gut feeling here. (Indeed, doing so is very likely to wallow in confirmation bias). Just look at the metacritic stats for IGN and Game Informer. On average, GI grade half a percentage point higher than other critics. On average, IGN grade 4% lower than other critics.

So they aren't especially out of whack, even if in particular cases they're more forgiving.
 
I

IdreamofHIME

Member
If you care about the scores games are getting, you're doing it wrong.
Read previews, watch videos and make your own mind up.

All a 9.5 does for me is put the game on my radar and i'll check into it, maybe.
 
T

TheNatural

My Member!
Phatmac said:
Ever consider that these games are actually good?
Click to expand...

Well it begs the question, I'm not saying they are influenced, but there's only two options here:

1) They are influenced, which means you can't trust the validity, and they're unnecessary.

2) They aren't influenced and the games are this good, but since virtually every multiplatform game is considered this good, reviews are unnecessary.

The end result is the same. Isn't it a virtual lock one way or another that Madden 14, NBA 2K14, Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed 4, Battlefield 4, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 4, are ALL guaranteed 8.5's (and probably above) this holiday?

It's become completely unnecessary to consider any media commentary on games in purchasing decisions.
 
B

BluePigGanon

Member
Based on your list of examples, a less seedy possibility is: big budget games with lots of talent and resources behind them are generally pretty good.
 
P

Poimandres

Member
Game Informer OR IGN have trashed plenty of these games.

Your theory kind of falls apart when you need to look at two seemingly unrelated sources to show that EVERY major game is reviewed well. Looking at any source individually, not every big game is a hit.

That said, I do think gaming media in general has a tendency of over rating big games.
 
T

toddhunter

Member
TheNatural said:
Well it begs the question, I'm not saying they are influenced, but there's only two optinos here:

1) They are influenced, which means you can't trust the validity, and they're unnecessary.

2) They aren't influenced and the games are this good, but since virtually every multiplatform game is considered this good, reviews are unnecessary.

The end result is the same. Isn't it a virtual lock one way or another that Madden 14, NBA 2K14, Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed 4, Battlefield 4, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 4, are ALL guaranteed 8.5's (and probably above) this holiday?

It's become completely unnecessary to consider any media commentary on games in purchasing decisions.
Click to expand...

What you do is ignore the scores and listen to or read what they actually say.

Ign say bioshock infinite on console at least has bad textures and frame rate issues. It also drags on for way too long during the middle of the game. Similarly the controls are fiddly with only being able to map two guns and powers.

This is all useful stuff to me. Who cares what score they put on the end? Good luck to them if they make a bit more cash by boosting it.
 
E

edeo

Member
Everyone is saying "those games are actually good".

That's not the point. They aren't top 10 percent good.

I don't bother reading GI reviews anymore. Their scores are horribly inflated.
 
mr stroke

mr stroke

Member
TheNatural said:
Well it begs the question, I'm not saying they are influenced, but there's only two options here:

1) They are influenced, which means you can't trust the validity, and they're unnecessary.

2) They aren't influenced and the games are this good, but since virtually every multiplatform game is considered this good, reviews are unnecessary.

The end result is the same. Isn't it a virtual lock one way or another that Madden 14, NBA 2K14, Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed 4, Battlefield 4, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 4, are ALL guaranteed 8.5's (and probably above) this holiday?

It's become completely unnecessary to consider any media commentary on games in purchasing decisions.
Click to expand...

GI-Madden 12 -7.5

http://www.gameinformer.com/games/madden_nfl_12/b/xbox360/archive/2011/08/26/fumble.aspx
 
M

MR BLACKMAGIK

Member
This is why I always take any review with a large bucket of salt. With most popular websites any AAA type game that comes out is never bad. I also hate it when they give games like Medal of Honor Warfighter a 4.5. I don't care how much you don't like the game, but if you think it's a 4.5 then you haven't played any bottom of the barrel games consoles have to offer.
 
I

Instro

Member
I'm pretty sure pubs practically write the reviews for them anyway. They no doubt get talking points and such to key in on, particularly if its an earlier review, for major games.

The bigger issue is with the current shoddy review system. We have reached a point where anything less than an 8 or 8.5 is considered a bad score in the eyes of the audience, which means there is even more pressure to give something above an 8. Whether or not these games are actually good is meaningless, but the entire scoring system is cheapened when so many games are getting 9's and above each year. I don't think it will ever be fixed, and the media is largely to blame for it. I really don't care to look at reviews anymore, for anything really, unless I hear the game is completely broken ala Sim City. Otherwise if its something I want, I'm going to pick it up regardless.
 
W

web01

Member
Gaming journalism is a joke. It is sad to see people here of GAF buy into the reviews scores so much when they mean absolutely nothing.
I rarely any attempt by reviewers to critically examine and break down the flaws in game play / balance / pacing and systems which are the most important things about a game.
All they do is regurgitate marketing buzz words and publisher PR spin. Even sites that seem to be loved by GAF like Giant Bomb are as guilty as the likes of IGN and so on.
 
M

MisterSamMan

Member
Sure, it may seem weird, but these aren't bad games. The better conspiracy theory would be that IGN is afraid to give a good game lower than an 8 because people don't understand that a 7 is good on the IGN scale. It's not a C. It's a 7, which is good.

Also it's not like they gave Aliens Colonial Marines a 9.
 
P

PBalfredo

Member
edeo said:
Everyone is saying "those games are actually good".

That's not the point. They aren't top 10 percent good.

I don't bother reading GI reviews anymore. Their scores are horribly inflated.
Click to expand...

Game reviews have never ever been on a bell curve.
 
Z

Zukuu

Banned
CALL KOTAKU, WE HAVE A STORY!


Seriously, whoever thought that reviewers of IGN and the likes are a 100% objective (well as objective as a 'review' can be) lives in the matrix. I don't say they are "bought", it's just that they are more prone to just "look at the good sides" a bit more.

You don't give bad scores to a high profile game (series) or the publisher will kick you out of its press release supply list. IGN can't afford to be on bad toes with Square, Capcom, EA or any other major publisher.

And Famitsu is a joke when it comes to ratings. I seriously hope no one is so naive to think they are honest.
 
A

Anteater

Member
It's not surprising that they actually like the AAA games if they share the same common traits and filled all the checkboxes.

The one thing that bothers me is why multiplatform AAA games would share the same score regardless of differences and get a free pass while games from smaller developers gets dogpiled on.

Example: Bayonetta PS3 reviews were pretty fair when it comes to scoring between ps3 and xbox360, ps3 version was inferior, got a crappier score, rightfully so.

Mass Effect 3, inferior framerate on ps3, skyrim, inferior framerate, technical problems on ps3, all rated the same across platforms (same as the PC version), the review even points to the PC version now as far as I know on IGN.

Bioshock Infinite got a "0.1" difference between 360 and PC on IGN, but I cannot tell what technical differences they have since I've never played this.

Why so inconsistent? Mass Effect 3 review on Polygon:

1Y6Oa4Z.png
 
E

equippedwithtowel

Member
TheNatural said:
Well it begs the question, I'm not saying they are influenced, but there's only two options here:

1) They are influenced, which means you can't trust the validity, and they're unnecessary.

2) They aren't influenced and the games are this good, but since virtually every multiplatform game is considered this good, reviews are unnecessary.

The end result is the same. Isn't it a virtual lock one way or another that Madden 14, NBA 2K14, Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed 4, Battlefield 4, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 4, are ALL guaranteed 8.5's (and probably above) this holiday?

It's become completely unnecessary to consider any media commentary on games in purchasing decisions.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of bad multiplatform games. Media isn't graded on a bell curve
 
A

Aquamarine

Member
web01 said:
Gaming journalism is a joke. It is sad to see people here of GAF buy into the reviews scores so much when they mean absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/b...and-for-online-raves.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

“The wheels of online commerce run on positive reviews,” said Bing Liu, a data-mining expert at the University of Illinois, Chicago, whose 2008 research showed that 60 percent of the millions of product reviews on Amazon are five stars and an additional 20 percent are four stars. “But almost no one wants to write five-star reviews, so many of them have to be created.”
Click to expand...

Better reviews = More sales for the publisher, especially if that better review comes from a place with lots of exposure (IGN). All industries employ it to some degree. The question is whether or not the big, corporate review sites fall prey to this more easily than others.
 
S

szaromir

Banned
Why does the OP give only 1 website's score for each game? Eg. Game Informer gave Sleeping Dogs 7.75 which contradicts the thread title.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IGN: A Year Since Its Release, Sony Seems to Have Abandoned PlayStation VR2
4 5 6 7 8
355
17K
CamHostage replied
Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons Remake | Review Thread
Analysis Review
10
1K
Magic Carpet replied
Two indie Steam games were disguised as Helldivers 2 to scam players
News Drama
41
2K
DaGwaphics replied
The Talos Principle 2 | Review Thread
Analysis Review 2
93
6K
BouncyFrag replied
Botany Manor | Review Thread
Analysis Review
5
716
Little Chicken replied
Top Bottom